(Reuters) - The share of part-time workers in the U.S. labor force is likely to remain high, meaning the labor market is still "far from normal," Atlanta Federal Reserve President Dennis Lockhart said on Thursday.In remarks prepared for delivery to a conference on workforce development, Lockhart said there was likely to be some reduction in the use of part-time workers as the economy strengthens further, but probably not to levels seen before the recession."In other words, preference for part-time workers is likely to persist," he said."For Fed policy purposes, the balance of evidence suggests the labor market is still far from normal, even if normal is not what it used to be."
The destruction of ambition and self-reliance. Check.
I cant figure out why corporations haven't created more jobs lately. Or if there is job creation eventually again some day (despite artificial intelligence, robotics, off shoring, inversions (not gonna happen in the gazillion instances of tax abatements, there's one going out to Kroger in your hometown, read more about it at http://wcsi.whiterivernews.com/templates/localnews_temp.asp?id=9674&storyno=2 ), whether you will grant anyone but the corporations the credit.
ReplyDeleteI "underworked" at Sears in the mid 80s in a part time position that had absolutely no chance of becoming full time so it has been going on at least that long and actually became a management strategy here in America (talk about cattle, these MBA types all do the same crap if it bolsters their pay and the corporate bottom line) during the Reagan adminstration.
ReplyDeleteThey did not want any more full timers. Would have to give them health and pension bennies, so that is how they got around it.
ReplyDeleteBoosting the bottom line is management's foremost responsibility.
ReplyDeletehe destruction of ambition and self-reliance. Check.
ReplyDeleteThe destruction of ambition and self-reliance. Check. It started under Ronnie's watch, part time hiring, it is not a product of whatever delusions you have regarding intentional acts being committed by the current adminstration.
ReplyDeleteWe never had this kind of percentage of them under Dutch or any other administration.
ReplyDeleteJust a snowball rolling down the hill. Like I said, I know when it started and it was under Ronnie admin. Those savvy MBA are nothing if not persistent, after their redundancy, of course. They are trained implementers. It works, so they all do it.
ReplyDeleteFeast your eyes on this article from 1991, Bippy. I know your side is going to win big these mid-terms, kinda like the other side won big 8 years ago, after which your old pal Rummy resigned and Cheney was consigned to the crybaby chair for his last 2 years in office. Yeah, you hoped Obama will fail. Well, I know you guys will fail which will set up another Democratic landslide in 2 short years.
ReplyDelete"These easily discharged "disposable," or contingent, workers make up nearly a fourth of the entire work force. They often create a burden on the rest of the country because they are generally ineligible for job-based health care, pensions and unemployment benefits and so depend on the rest of us when their income stops. This trend, exacerbated by the lingering economic slump, ought to become a red-hot campaign issue for the Democrats, who are already lambasting Bush for doing practically nothing to cope with the country's woes. Bush's handlers may come up with something, but some of his wilder campaign promises don't make it easy. Take, for example, his ridiculous 1988 campaign boast that 30 million new jobs could be created if he won the presidency. Bush apparently picked that vote-attracting number out of the air, and he may try to just ignore it. But it is too tempting a target for his political opponents to ignore, because he missed his goal by an incredible 29.5 million jobs, which AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland says Bush now owes American workers. No president can legitimately claim all the credit when the good times roll in, and none can be held fully responsible when things are in a mess, as they are now. However, many of the current economic problems can be blamed on the Reagan-Bush "trickle down," supply-side economic policies: Help the rich get richer, and, in theory, they will then invest their money in new enterprises so that their wealth will trickle down to the rest of us. The theory is failing. Many voters are blaming the Reagan-Bush policies for our misfortunes, and Bush's dwindling popularity may drop further when workers who have not been personally hit hard by the recession get a more complete picture of some distressing changes going on in the workplace. Already generally known is that the real income of middle-income workers continues to drop and that of the poor is plummeting, while the income of those at the top of the economic pile soars. Also, it may be fairly well known that, although the official unemployment rate is hovering close to an unhealthy 7%, the real jobless rate is almost double that. The 7% rate doesn't include the more than 1 million "discouraged" workers who have given up hope of finding a job and so are not counted among the jobless."
Read more at http://articles.latimes.com/1991-12-10/business/fi-329_1_full-time-workers
The characterization of Dick Cheney's dire warnings about the threats we face as "cry babying" shows a complete lack of understanding of world affairs. The term "trickle-down" likewise shows a complete lack of understanding of the principles that make for economic freedom.
ReplyDeleteBTW, polls show that the public now thinks W had a better managerial handle on America's situation than the MEC does.
Forget the past though, here's what's trickling down (like pee) from the Barons of Prosperity, aka corporations, today:
ReplyDelete"Headlines are boasting of economic recovery and falling unemployment rates. But behind those optimistic numbers and forecasts is a workplace ecosystem that's been fundamentally altered by the Great Recession's shift of bargaining power away from employees. Employers are creating jobs, but against a backdrop of mass joblessness they've done so on their own terms and family life bares the burden."
Read more at http://www.vox.com/2014/10/27/7072567/flexibility-paradox
Read more at http://www.vox.com/2014/10/27/7072567/flexibility-paradox
Complete lack of understanding? OK, have it your way. In your own world. You always have and are free to do so. Since you bring up polls, they said only 13 per cent approved of Cheney when his ass finally got out of power.
ReplyDeleteThe crap your ilk pulled for nearly 8 years didn't help much, did it. Now we got ISIS and of course all the blame for it. You don't invade countries and bomb the piss out of them to make friends and influence their people. And you didn't, lol. The truth is we just took over for European imperialists all over the world after World War II and have not increased the love expressed by those "occupied" territories by any but the cattle there which you try to call many of us here now. You know you'd be "there" with your gun in your hand to kill Americans if you lived there too.
ReplyDeleteAnd you'll never convince me that marijuana prohibition is a travesty of freedom by citing your perception that I completely misunderstand history. What do you want me to do, be scared to bring it up around you?
ReplyDeleteAnyhow, you never responded to the truth that the Reagan Bush policies began our slide into a part time working world and, actually, my response regarding joints being found at airports over the past 50 years resulting in wrecked lives was posted in another thread as was my comment about Cheney.
ReplyDeleteYes, our hobbled post-America with lowered expectations was born in bombastic circumstances, the election of 1980.
ReplyDeleteI post this comment here as well as under the post about the UK airport guy because it is relevant here as well:
ReplyDeleteHow often have major opinion journals, either of the right (National Review, Weekly Standard, Commentary, etc.) or the left( The Nation, Mother Jones, New Republic, etc,) had cover stories or lengthy in-depth articles on weed policy in comparison to actually important issues over the last 30 years (tax policy, environmental regulation, Communism, radical Islam, gender, race, federal budget, persecution of Jews and Christians, Middle East, North Korea)? I daresay it's a lopsided ratio in favor of the important stuff.
The "crap we pulled" sure did help. Iraq was stable and Sunnis and Shiites were forming a functioning government. al-Qaeda in Iraq (which became ISIS) was reduced to irrelevancy.
ReplyDelete